Proposal: Trade Rumours/Proposals PART XXXXIX

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ice-Tray

Registered User
Jan 31, 2006
16,383
8,188
Victoria
You remember how trading for Hamonic made it necessary to move Zaitsev otherwise we couldn’t acquire another top 4 defenseman and properly slot Hamonic on the third pair because of budget/cap?

Acquiring Savard would be similar.
I don’t remember that slant at all, did you just make that up?

Acquiring Hamonic served to fulfill a promise to the Sanderson’s while also making it possible to remove Zaitsev from the lineup permanently. It also netted us a serviceable top 4 RD who could play on our team should we not be able to find a guy in the off season, which is what happened. Good thing we traded for him early.

I was wondering who would be next now that Zaitsev is gone and Branstrom has protected status. Looks like it’s Hammy in the cross hairs next!
 

Bileur

Registered User
Jun 15, 2004
18,538
7,289
Ottawa
I don’t remember that slant at all, did you just make that up?

Acquiring Hamonic served to fulfill a promise to the Sanderson’s while also making it possible to remove Zaitsev from the lineup permanently. It also netted us a serviceable top 4 RD who could play on our team should we not be able to find a guy in the off season, which is what happened. Good thing we traded for him early.

I was wondering who would be next now that Zaitsev is gone and Branstrom has protected status. Looks like it’s Hammy in the cross hairs next!

I don’t know what you’re on about now.

The requirement to move Zaitsev as part of a deal to add another top 4 defenseman has been discussed pretty constantly since the acquisitions of Giroux and DeBrincat brought the Sens closer to the cap (and presumed internal cap). It’s not a slant, everyone should be able to see it looking at the numbers.

It’s not a slight to Hamonic to say he’s better slotted on the third pair at this point in his career. It’s just a fact. Most saw this coming in the summer, his play has borne that out.

I think Savard is heading the same direction and don’t want the Sens to spend 3 million on a bottom pair guy, particularly when they need to extend an actual top 4 guy in Zub, have to make a decision on DeBrincat and have to extend Pinto and have to make a decision on Talbot, on top of hopefully adding another top 4 defenseman.
 
Last edited:

Ice-Tray

Registered User
Jan 31, 2006
16,383
8,188
Victoria
I don’t know what you’re on about now.

The requirement to move Zaitsev as part of a deal to add another top 4 defenseman has been discussed pretty constantly since the acquisitions of Giroux and DeBrincat brought the Sens closer to the cap (and presumed internal cap). It’s not a slant, everyone should be able to see it looking at the numbers.

It’s not a slight to Hamonic to say he’s better slotted on the third pair at this point in his career. It’s just a fact. Most saw this coming in the summer, his play has borne that out.

I think Savard is heading the same direction and don’t want the Sens to spend 3 million on a bottom pair guy, particularly when they need to extend an actual top 4 guy in Zub, have to make a decision on DeBrincat and have to extend Pinto and have to make a decision on Talbot, on top of hopefully adding another top 4 defenseman.
I’m not sure why you’re linking Hamonic and Zaitsev. ‘Most people’ assumed that Brown was traded to free up money for a potential D addition both now and going forward into the season.

Trading for Hamonic didn’t have anything to do with now having to move Zaitsev. Zaitsev not being very good, especially to start the season is why he needs to be moved. Hamonic isn’t signed for next season so he isn’t a cap issue for us at all. Getting rid of Zaitsev’s contract is necessary to make room, I agree with you there though. Hamonic obviously hasn’t forced us to move Zaitsev.

Hamonic has been fine in his role. He’s the fourth best all around defender on the team at the moment as is the spot the team is looking to upgrade on. Sure it would be great have that player now, but it is what it is. Since you like ‘facts’ It’s good that we have him to play the spot, otherwise your boy Zaitsev would be filling that role right now!

Savard is a huge no for me as well. He was bad when people coveted him last time, and he’s as now.
 

Loach

Registered User
Jun 9, 2021
2,688
1,740
I don’t remember that slant at all, did you just make that up?

Acquiring Hamonic served to fulfill a promise to the Sanderson’s while also making it possible to remove Zaitsev from the lineup permanently. It also netted us a serviceable top 4 RD who could play on our team should we not be able to find a guy in the off season, which is what happened. Good thing we traded for him early.

I was wondering who would be next now that Zaitsev is gone and Branstrom has protected status. Looks like it’s Hammy in the cross hairs next!
Geoff Sanderson wanted a vet to play with Jake. Could have got a good one for the 7m+ we're paying Zaitsev and Hamomic, with some extra left over. Hamonic was never in the cross hairs..just a bad trade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bileur

GCK

Registered User
Oct 15, 2018
15,795
10,030
Myers is less bad, but a team desperate for good RD being willing to trade him away should be a massive red flag.

Dorion already made that mistake taking Hamonic off their hands, so I doubt it'll matter in this case either.
Hamonic has not been a mistake
 
  • Like
Reactions: Laphroaig

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
54,005
31,204
Hamonic has not been a mistake
He's been fine as a temporary option, the question is what doors did acquiring him close, and unfortunately there is no way to know.

Maybe if we didn't pick up Hamonic, we'd have outbid NJ for Marino, for example, or closed a deal on Chychrun.

Even if we ignore those hypotheticals, without Hamonic, we probably start the year with Zaitsev playing alongside Chabot or JBD, then have Zub with Sanderson. Is the drop off that significant? Does it even matter if it was at this point?

I'm not saying trading for Hamonic was definitely a mistake, I'm just open to the possibility that there were alternative options that put us in a better position going forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BonHoonLayneCornell

Bileur

Registered User
Jun 15, 2004
18,538
7,289
Ottawa
I’m not sure why you’re linking Hamonic and Zaitsev. ‘Most people’ assumed that Brown was traded to free up money for a potential D addition both now and going forward into the season.

Trading for Hamonic didn’t have anything to do with now having to move Zaitsev. Zaitsev not being very good, especially to start the season is why he needs to be moved. Hamonic isn’t signed for next season so he isn’t a cap issue for us at all. Getting rid of Zaitsev’s contract is necessary to make room, I agree with you there though. Hamonic obviously hasn’t forced us to move Zaitsev.

Hamonic has been fine in his role. He’s the fourth best all around defender on the team at the moment as is the spot the team is looking to upgrade on. Sure it would be great have that player now, but it is what it is. Since you like ‘facts’ It’s good that we have him to play the spot, otherwise your boy Zaitsev would be filling that role right now!

Savard is a huge no for me as well. He was bad when people coveted him last time, and he’s as now.

I know you understand what I’m saying, you’re just being overly defensive.

Zaitsev’s salary, which will still be on the books next season unless the Sens trade an asset to get rid of it, + Hamonic’s salary made it difficult to acquire another top 4 D.

If you don’t add Hamonic, you have another 3 million to work with for the 2022-2023 season.

I agree that without Hamonic Zaitsev would likely still be on the team. He’d likely be overpaid on the third pair, which is a worse on-ice outcome than Hamonic but would nevertheless free up money to add someone else into top 4 role.

If we trade for Savard, we’re adding a 3.5 million dollar defenseman for 2023-2024 and 2024-2025, while still having Zaitsev on the books for 2023-2024. We’re once again jammed, in a tight spot to add more D.

The reason I think they’re linked is that in any trade rumours we see, the Sens seem to be asking the other team to take on Zaitsev (Chychrun, Myers etc). It could just as well be linked to additions like DeBrincat and Giroux, but those guys are playing in proper slots (top 6 players) and so it makes sense to pay them accordingly.

Obviously getting rid of Zaitsev would have been the best case scenario. His contract is far more the problem in this situation than Hamonic’s, but Zaitsev is so bad that it will take assets to move him. I think Savard will be the same in 2024-2025.

I’d be far more interested in extending Hamonic on a short term, discounted deal than trading for Savard (who is the same age as Hamonic). If he’s not interested in that, I’d take my chances with the trade market or JBD/Thomson next year.

You perfectly understood slotting/salary concerns in the Brown for a 2nd thread :

Who is he bumping from the roster though.

Of course there is physical space on special teams, by the idea of him bumping Joseph, who we also like down to the 4th line, and then Watson or Kelly off the roster, for 4 million dollars, seems a bit silly for defensive play and PK.

Brown was awesome for us, but the top 6 was filled, and the top 9 is also full. Brown wants more cash than Joseph, and good for him, but picking up those two wingers meant that Brown and his aspirations for more minutes and a solid opportunity for his contract year died.

We had room for Brown if we ignore role, the players interests, and the cap. But brown doesn’t want a reduced role and dead end for his contract year, and nor should he, and we don’t want a 4 million guy on the 4th line.

He and Paul were great players, wrong team at the wrong time for a long stay.

What?? Formy scored 18 goals and he gets a demotion to the 4th line so that Paul and his 10 goals can drag Pinto down???

We can love our hard working awesome bottom 6 players, but also wish them well as they love on to have their shot on teams that aren’t as deep as our is shaping up to be.

No chance that Brown or Paul bump Formy down the lineup at this stage in the game, and I loved both players and am happy for them.


You have to tweak your understanding of value to include cap space.

The value of the trade was a 2nd round pick AND 4 million of cap/spending space.

That’s valuable. We as Sens fans need to start adding that to the equation now. Seemingly gone are the days of deals to shed spending, now we’re all about freeing up space to sign huge deals to UFA’s and RFA’s.

Feels pretty good when you think about it, we’re finally playing a big league game.

I don’t see how not wanting to pay bottom pair defenders more than bottom pair money in order to afford adding another top 4 defenseman is any different than not wanting to pay Brown 4 million to play on the bottom lines.
 

SpezDispenser

Registered User
Aug 15, 2007
26,785
6,306
I'm smitten by the chaos girrafe nickname the nucks gave Myers so I'm pretty torn...
I think you're gonna see myers here, so don't worry. The Zaitsev for myers must be so tempting for Dorion. Although...Zaitsev could block and probably already did.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
54,005
31,204
I think you're gonna see myers here, so don't worry. The Zaitsev for myers must be so tempting for Dorion. Although...Zaitsev could block and probably already did.
Lol, why would Zaitsev block a trade from Belleville to Vancouver? I guess he might be worried about going to Utica?

Myers is the one I'd "worry" about blocking a trade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DrEasy

Big Muddy

Registered User
Dec 15, 2019
8,642
4,115
Habs fans are by far the worst. Insanely delusional.
Could be. I just don't run across them as much for whatever reason. That Myers trade thread on the mainboard was certainly a hoot though - entertainment.
 

Ice-Tray

Registered User
Jan 31, 2006
16,383
8,188
Victoria
Geoff Sanderson wanted a vet to play with Jake. Could have got a good one for the 7m+ we're paying Zaitsev and Hamomic, with some extra left over. Hamonic was never in the cross hairs..just a bad trade.
I mean sure, but who is that player? And what makes you think we wouldn’t still have traded for said player? We could have made room in the summer if that player existed.
 

Loach

Registered User
Jun 9, 2021
2,688
1,740
I mean sure, but who is that player? And what makes you think we wouldn’t still have traded for said player? We could have made room in the summer if that player existed.
Polkaroos. You know. The players that teams get every year, but Ottawa doesn't so they don't exist.
 

Ice-Tray

Registered User
Jan 31, 2006
16,383
8,188
Victoria
I know you understand what I’m saying, you’re just being overly defensive.

Zaitsev’s salary, which will still be on the books next season unless the Sens trade an asset to get rid of it, + Hamonic’s salary made it difficult to acquire another top 4 D.

If you don’t add Hamonic, you have another 3 million to work with for the 2022-2023 season.

I agree that without Hamonic Zaitsev would likely still be on the team. He’d likely be overpaid on the third pair, which is a worse on-ice outcome than Hamonic but would nevertheless free up money to add someone else into top 4 role.

If we trade for Savard, we’re adding a 3.5 million dollar defenseman for 2023-2024 and 2024-2025, while still having Zaitsev on the books for 2023-2024. We’re once again jammed, in a tight spot to add more D.

The reason I think they’re linked is that in any trade rumours we see, the Sens seem to be asking the other team to take on Zaitsev (Chychrun, Myers etc). It could just as well be linked to additions like DeBrincat and Giroux, but those guys are playing in proper slots (top 6 players) and so it makes sense to pay them accordingly.

Obviously getting rid of Zaitsev would have been the best case scenario. His contract is far more the problem in this situation than Hamonic’s, but Zaitsev is so bad that it will take assets to move him. I think Savard will be the same in 2024-2025.

I’d be far more interested in extending Hamonic on a short term, discounted deal than trading for Savard (who is the same age as Hamonic). If he’s not interested in that, I’d take my chances with the trade market or JBD/Thomson next year.

You perfectly understood slotting/salary concerns in the Brown for a 2nd thread :





I don’t see how not wanting to pay bottom pair defenders more than bottom pair money in order to afford adding another top 4 defenseman is any different than not wanting to pay Brown 4 million to play on the bottom lines.
Bil, I’m not being defensive at all, no need to be dismissive like that.

I don’t see a connection between Zaitsev and Hamonic. We aren’t in a cap crunch situation right now and Hammy is already off the books when things start to get tight next summer. Zaitsev needs to be jettisoned before next season to free up space, that’s a given.

If we didn’t add Hamonic we would likely not have an RD right now as good as he is since we failed to get one this summer when we were actively trying to get one irrespective of Hamonic or Zaitsev. I mean we never even heard about a guy we missed out on because of money in general. In fact the only guy we heard solid info about was Chycrun being too expensive asset wise, and. Burns and Klingberg taking a pass on us.

Savard isn’t good, do not want to add. If we find a top four RD that is available that we like I suspect that PD will make the trade and sort out making room regardless. We only have to find a way to dump Zaitsev, which after paying his signing bonus shouldn’t be too hard, though it will cost.

I still perfectly understand slotting, but you seem to be banking on the mystery RD that we don’t have and couldn’t get, being in the line up if we didn’t nab Hammy. I’m looking at the roster right now without Hammy, with Zaitsev in it, and without the mystery top 4 RD in it that we tried to get all summer regardless, and failed.

We need Hammy this year given the reality of the situation on the back end, he would be better slotted lower if we could find the guy we are actively searching for, but until then he’s better than the alternatives we currently have on the team and in the system.

Picking up Hammy was a solid move because it turns out we actually needed him. That’s all I’m saying. I agree with that we need to be able to get to a place where Zaitsev is gone, Savard is not acquired, and Hammy is either gone or playing bottom pairing minutes.
 

Ice-Tray

Registered User
Jan 31, 2006
16,383
8,188
Victoria
Polkaroos. You know. The players that teams get every year, but Ottawa doesn't so they don't exist.
Hahahaha, but he’s right there, look behind you!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jokes aside, those guys never cost 7 mil, which is both promising and depressing since we tend to miss those diamonds in the rough :(
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad